|
That's because there's a lot more budget to be played with, for a studio-backed mega-blockbuster, than there is for a horror film.
Most contemporary horror films are independently funded, unlike a chosen few such as Prometheus which get plenty of studio-backing (and studio-honchos intrusion, but that's a separate topic). They are then selected/bought by a studio to release it. Usually the makers have to do with the budget they have in hand, that's why modern CGI isn't that effective as it should be. Call me nostalgic but I still prefer props/make-up over CGI, any day. |
I appreciate CGI when it's used to its best effect, but far to often it's just thrown in because they can and it's the newest toy and it really doesn't help anything... If you can't do it right I would rather it just not be used at all.
The only other problem I have with CGI is there are times it looks to... pretty... Even when they're trying to create something horrifying the very nature of CGI, I guess, makes it look far to appealing and "cool" and the whole point of what was being created in the first place gets lost. Practical effects may not be state of the art, but they're so unreal looking that they do a far better job. Some of the most terrifying imagery I've ever seen in horror films have been done with claymation. The only other thing that really annoys me in horror is the over sexualization of female victims where it doesn't belong (if sex is part of the point of what's happening it's fine, but if we're showing ten minutes of boobs before a woman is stabbed because... boobs then it's just grating). And finally the overuse of gore to try and distract from the fact that nothing else is going on. I enjoy a dismembered body as much as the next person, but if that is literally all your movie has going for it then there's a serious problem, and far to often I feel like it's believed if you throw buckets of blood around that's all you need to make the film scary. |
^What do you think of Brain Dead?
|
Gratuitous sex and nudity. Don't need it, just get on with the story already!
|
Quote:
And that goes for all genres. Except porn, of course. |
Quote:
Okay so I realized there are two movies to which you could be referring; a 1990 film about a neurosurgeon going off his rocker and a 1992...3? New Zealand film about zombies neither of which I had seen before. So I watched the 1990 film since it was readily available on Netflix, sounded awesome and I wasn't disappointed. That was a piece of art as far as I'm concerned. Just wow. As far as the zombie film goes I'll pick that one up tomorrow from the video rental place next to my work. |
I am talking about the Peter Jackson Movie film - as it really defines a film with an 'overuse of gore', yet it is a fantastic movie. I think you have to judge things on a film to film basis.
The nudity in Re-Animator and more so in tons of Troma Movies and exploitation classics are Blood Sucking Freaking is totally gratuitous yet I really enjoy them. The very nature of the Exploitation Genre revolves around Sex and Violence (ok sex and violence long with giant afros, kung fu and nazi uniforms). I guess I'm not explicitly talking about the horror genre but when it comes to horror/exploitation the lines blur. |
Quote:
And in the same vein...less graphic, long, intense rape scenes would be cool. I'm a little disconcerted by how many I've seen in recent history. |
The 'they-think-it's-safe' trope that gets tagged onto the end of every single film now. You know, where you think the monster/lunatic/ghost/whatever has been bested and in the last few seconds of the film...or, more likely, halfway through the ending credits, you get some little teaser that whatever it is isn't defeated (big gasp! not.) In some instances, it follows...like the close-up of the car's grill moving at the end of 'Christine'. THAT makes sense and is gratifying - in a film about a demonic car that repairs itself, you EXPECT it to do that at the end!
But FFS, does it have to be every film? |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:00 PM. |